However I would like to return by saying that when you read
the code that top Perl programmers write when it counts,
people like merlyn and Tom Christiansen, that code does
not take a genius to understand.

I feel that if there are not at least 3 other people at
my job who could pick up and understand my code (I work
at a small shop), then I
am doing something wrong. That does not mean that I should
not constantly strive to write better code. It means that
I need to find a balance between my taking advantage of
more knowledge and my having made sure that people I am
mentoring understand the features I use.

I pity any C programmer who tries to maintain code where
I in different sections switch from object oriented to
functional to straight procedural code. (Not all at once,
each in the place in the system where it fit properly.)
I would not pity the person who taught me how to use those
ideas, nor the two others who I personally brought up to
speed on Perl.

YMMV. TIMTOWTDI because different ways fit different
situations best. And definitely questions about who will
have to understand it next play a valid role. (If you
read through my previous responses you can see what my
code looks like. I am no Randall, but make your own mind
up about whether you find it legible.)

When putting a smiley right before a closing parenthesis, do you:

Use two parentheses: (Like this: :) )
Use one parenthesis: (Like this: :)
Reverse direction of the smiley: (Like this: (: )
Use angle/square brackets instead of parentheses
Use C-style commenting to set the smiley off from the closing parenthesis
Make the smiley a dunce: (:>
I disapprove of emoticons
Other